Posted on 01/22/26
| News Source: FOX45
Baltimore, MD - Jan. 22, 2026 - Immigration debate took center stage in Annapolis on Thursday, with hundreds packing into a Senate judiciary hearing on two controversial bills.
The first proposal, Senate Bill 245, would prohibit local law enforcement agencies from participating in the federal 287(g) program, which allows deputies working inside local detention centers to identify and detain individuals suspected of being in the country illegally.
Currently, eight Maryland sheriff’s offices have signed 287(g) agreements — five of them within the past year.
Supporters of the bill argued the program erodes trust between police and immigrant communities. They also claimed the vast majority of deportations tied to the program involve low-level offenses, with many cases never resulting in a conviction.
Opponents, including several law enforcement leaders, warn the proposal could have serious public safety consequences. They argue ending the partnership would limit cooperation with federal immigration authorities when individuals accused or convicted of serious crimes are already in custody.
Harford County Sheriff Jeff Gahler also argued that barring ICE from operating inside detention centers could trigger an influx of ICE agents on Maryland’s streets. Likely, leading to more random sweeps, rather than targeted enforcements.
“I think we've heard it from Tom Homan himself, it’s going to lead to more unrest in the communities like we're seeing elsewhere. We don't need that here, and it's going to lead to more crime in that we're going to have to open our doors to offenders to go back out into the community to reoffend,” Gahler said.
Sen. Will Smith, chair of the Senate Judicial Proceedings Committee, pushed back on that assessment, calling such outcomes speculative.
“I don’t know that,” Smith said. “It’s a known, unknown. We don’t know that’s going to happen. But we look at what happened in Virginia, the governor signed an executive order doing the same thing we’re trying to do today. You have not seen a surge of ICE officers into Virginia.”
Lawmakers also weighed in on a second proposal, Senate Bill 1, which would restrict face coverings worn by law enforcement officers while on duty in Maryland. That proposal includes exceptions for undercover work, clear face shields and religious or medical needs.
Supporters said visible officers increase accountability and public trust, while law enforcement experts argue face coverings can be critical for officer safety, protecting identities during volatile situations and preventing retaliation.
No votes were taken during the Jan. 22 hearing. The session was simply informational, giving both sides an opportunity to present their arguments. However, if these bills are eventually passed, both will likely face constitutional challenges centered on whether the state has legal authority over a federal agency.